ArticlePrimary health care research & development2025
Recruiting patients with persistent physical symptoms and no specific diagnosis for clinical trials in primary care: a qualitative study of four scenarios.
Article in Primary health care research & development, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo investigate how to recruit patients rigosrously in general practice for trials based on symptoms as predefined inclusion criteria rather than a well-defined diagnosis. We used persistent physical symptoms (PPS) as a target condition.
backgroundConducting randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in general practice is crucial for evidence-based decision-making and treatment in frontline healthcare. However, recruitment is often challenged in general practice because many patients have vaguely defined conditions, such as PPS.
methodsWe used qualitative semi-structured interviews to explore the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) on different recruitment scenarios, while paying particular attention to the logistics and feasibility in routine care. A total of 11 GPs from seven clinics were strategically recruited. The GPs were presented with one recruitment scenario (pre-consultation screening) and encouraged to suggest other scenarios. We conducted a thematic framework analysis of the interview material.
findingsTo ensure valid intervention research, one predefined scenario was discussed, and three additional scenarios were co-created during the interviews: (1) opportunistic screening, (2) pre-consultation screening, (3) audit (retrospective and prospective), and (4) random sample screening of the practice population. These scenarios differ with respect to logistical complexity, comparability to daily clinical practice, and entailed selection bias. Every scenario requires individual adaptation and implementation support to be feasible in routine care in general practice. The present study provides approaches for rigorous primary care research based on RCTs for frequent and vaguely defined conditions, but it also highlights a need to develop research methods better suited to frontline healthcare interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.